I thought you might like to know that a fragment of Keats's 'I Stood Tiptoe Upon A Little Hill' (1816), which previously belonged to Keats's school friend, Charles Cowden Clarke, will be auctioned later this year in London:

I e-mailed The House in Hampstead and asked if they, or the City of London, were going to post a bid. Hopefully they will, and hopefully they will be successful, as they were with Keats's letter to Fanny last March. As far as I'm concerned, that fragment shouldn't be auctioned but donated to The House - where it belongs; however, I suppose it's always about money. Heck, I'm all for Harvard donating its Keats's hoard to Hampstead as well. I know ALowell and FHolland-Day (and others, I'm sure) donated their collections to Harvard, but it doesn't seem right (to me) that all things Keatsian aren't in Hampstead where they belong!! It's ironic that Harvard has a larger Keats stash than London/Hampstead; it's almost blasphemous, in a way. Sure, Cambridge, Mass. is much closer to me than London, but when I see Keats stuff I'd prefer it to be where he would want it.And shame on CCClarke and CABrown for cutting up the manuscripts they did and divvying them out as souvenirs! I can half understand why they did, but a big part of me believes that the act confirms little faith in Keats's after-fame. You would think the members of the Keats Circle would want to keep the original manuscripts of their "pet lamb (in a sentimental farce)" whole, together, and safe. Perhaps Dick Woodhouse was the only fore-sighted one of the bunch. I'm not too sure Keats would appreciate his manuscripts cut up and handed out as souvenirs; he certainly mentioned nothing about it in his pitiful will - just his books, and in perfect iambic pentameter (ever the poet!): "My chest of book divide among my friends." No mention of "cut up my manuscripts and hand them out to anyone who asks."

Last edited by Ennis on Thu Jan 17, 2013 7:12 pm, edited 1 time in total.

"But if you will fully love me, though there may be some fire, 'twill not be more than we can bear when moistened and bedewed with Pleasures." JK to FB 08.07.1819

As far as I'm concerned, that fragment shouldn't be auctioned but donated to The House - where it belongs; however, I suppose it's always about money. Heck, I'm all for Harvard donating its Keats's hoard to Hampstead as well. I know ALowell and FHolland-Day (and others, I'm sure) donated their collections to Harvard, but it doesn't seem right (to me) that all things Keatsian aren't in Hampstead where they belong!! It's ironic that Harvard has a larger Keats stash than London/Hampstead; it's almost blasphemous, in a way. Sure, Cambridge, Mass. is much closer to me than London, but when I see Keats stuff I'd prefer it to be where he would want it.

Totally agree- his manuscripts should be all be in Hampstead.

John....you did not live to see-who we are because of what you left,what it is we are in what we make of you.Peter Sanson, 1995.

About cutting up letters, etc.: this was a common practice in the 19th century. It wasn't neccessarily a good practice, but it was common enough. Also, it wasn't just Amy Lowell et al. who gave stuff to Harvard. There was something called the "Speed Bequest" that sent some Keats material to Harvard. I assume that this was made up of a lot of items that had once belonged to George Keats and was passed down through his daughter's descendants. (Does anybody know anything more about this? BrokenLyre, how about you?)

I would prefer that all Keats material be somewhere safe, even if it's on this side of the Atlantic, rather than falling apart in someone's desk or dresser drawer like one fairly recently recovered letter. (It was a letter from John to Tom and was owned by some older lady who, while being a huge admirer of Keats, was embarrassed by its contents: the letter contained some mildly scatalogical humor.)

"The philosopher proves that the philosopher exists. The poet merely enjoys existence."Wallace Stevens

[quote="Cybele"]About cutting up letters, etc.: this was a common practice in the 19th century. It wasn't neccessarily a good practice, but it was common enough. Also, it wasn't just Amy Lowell et al. who gave stuff to Harvard. There was something called the "Speed Bequest" that sent some Keats material to Harvard. I assume that this was made up of a lot of items that had once belonged to George Keats and was passed down through his daughter's descendants. (Does anybody know anything more about this? BrokenLyre, how about you?)

I would prefer that all Keats material be somewhere safe, even if it's on this side of the Atlantic, rather than falling apart in someone's desk or dresser drawer like one fairly recently recovered letter. (It was a letter from John to Tom and was owned by some older lady who, while being a huge admirer of Keats, was embarrassed by its contents: the letter contained some mildly scatalogical humor.)[/quote

I, too, of course want all of it kept safe and together, but it still belongs in (to?) Hampstead. I don't doubt cutting up beloved manuscripts wasn't the norm, I just wish it hadn't been done.

"But if you will fully love me, though there may be some fire, 'twill not be more than we can bear when moistened and bedewed with Pleasures." JK to FB 08.07.1819

Raphael wrote:Let's hope a kind and rich! collector buys it and donates it to Keats House....

Yes, exactly! It should definitely go into a collection where it can be properly cared for and shared with the public and academics.I feel sad that they don't have Keats manuscripts on display anymore at Keats House. They told me they were removed because of the many years that they were improperly displayed.

There is *nothing* like reading a Keats manuscript. The sense of presence, of history, of emotion. . .they just can't be conveyed the same way even in facsimile.

Raphael wrote:Let's hope a kind and rich! collector buys it and donates it to Keats House....

Yes, exactly! It should definitely go into a collection where it can be properly cared for and shared with the public and academics.I feel sad that they don't have Keats manuscripts on display anymore at Keats House. They told me they were removed because of the many years that they were improperly displayed.

There is *nothing* like reading a Keats manuscript. The sense of presence, of history, of emotion. . .they just can't be conveyed the same way even in facsimile.

You'd have thought thei curator would have known how to care for old manuscripts, shame. I agree, original manuscripts have a special presence. I loved seeing the ones in the Bronte Parsonage. I highly recommend this house to Bronte fans. I went 2 years ago and was lucky that Emily's Piano has been restored and a pianist played it when I was there.

John....you did not live to see-who we are because of what you left,what it is we are in what we make of you.Peter Sanson, 1995.

That's a shame, if it's the case that Keats House in Hampstead can't afford it. I wonder whether the Keats-Shelley House in Rome would be interested in purchasing it? I fear they wouldn't have the financial resources to buy it, but it would be the next best option if the manuscript can't be added to the Hampstead collection.

"Why should we be owls, when we can be Eagles?" (Keats to Reynolds, 3 February 1818)

I heard from Holly Booth, the "interpetation officer" at the Keats House on 31st January, and this was her response:

Dear Ennis,

Thank you for your email and for your continued Keats-related enthusiasm.

We are in the process of liaising with other public institutions and funding bodies to establish potential avenues of funding and to see who else might be interested in bidding. Obviously we would love to own this small manuscript, but there is a lot of planning to do before the auction. At the time of writing, the final decision has not yet been made.